[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works no
From: |
Klaus Weide |
Subject: |
Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now] |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Oct 1997 22:08:04 -0600 (CST) |
On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Nelson Henry Eric wrote:
[Wayne:]
> > The description of my four defines is loose, but there really isn't any
> > point in clearing them up until the real defines are changed into more
> > meaningful and platform independent ones. They still need to be recorded
> > somewhere. We used to keep ifdef info in the Makefile. Where are we
> > keeping it now that the makefile is going away?
Good question. I don't know the answer.
It used to be Makefile (for non-VMS things), then makefile.in +
README.configure.
Since some of those don't apply just for Unix, someone compiling for some
other system shouldn't have to look in a for-Unix makefile.
> The original Makefile was re-named Makefile.old, and is being preserved
> (It's not `going away'.) in the docs subdirectory as an important record
> and as a template for people who might have reason to compile by hand.
>
> It's my personal opinion that the record of your modifications, however
> "loose", should be in the CHANGES series of files. Tom and Klaus both
> created one, "CHANGES.configure" and "CHANGES.chartrans". The Win32/DOS
> port is as much a revolutionary change to Lynx.
I don't think there is anything of interest in CHANGES.chartrans which
isn't in CHANGES.new, and it isn't up to date, so I plan to remove it.
I don't know about CHANGES.configure.
> This is out of my territory, but if Klaus is willing, I'd like to suggest
> that the reference to README.win-386 in the 1997-02-28 entry of CHANGES.new,
> "See README.win-386 for more info.", be substituted with the pertinent
> information itself (the part about the creation of the defines), preferably
> as verbatim as possible. There is no need to include the compile particulars
> in the CHANGES file, and the INSTALLATION file would be more straight-forward
> without the porting information. Also, as long as a reference is made to
> "README.win-386" from any other file in the distribution, it can't be erased.
I don't mind changing CHANGES(.new), but a summary of all the possible
ifdef symbols that may be used in the code is something else. So maybe we
should create a file README.defines or defines.txt or something similar
for that.
Klaus
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send a mail message to address@hidden
; with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
; quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;
- more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Nelson Henry Eric, 1997/10/27
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Nelson Henry Eric, 1997/10/27
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Nelson Henry Eric, 1997/10/27
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now],
Klaus Weide <=
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Nelson Henry Eric, 1997/10/28
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Doug Kaufman, 1997/10/28
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Wayne Buttles, 1997/10/28
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Bill Schiavo, 1997/10/29
- LYNX-DEV more about DJGPP port, INSTALLATION, Leonid Pauzner, 1997/10/30
- Re: LYNX-DEV more about DJGPP port, INSTALLATION, Doug Kaufman, 1997/10/30
- Re: more on INSTALLATION [was Re: LYNX-DEV Thanks! DOS Compile works now], Bill Schiavo, 1997/10/29